Hi!
> Rafael,
> On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 12:24:45PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > Pavel, do you think we can remove the PF_NOFREEZE from bluetooth, BTW?
>
> The create_workqueue by default marks the worker_threads to be
> non_freezable. For cpu hotplug, all workqueues can be frozen
> e
Rafael,
On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 12:24:45PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> Pavel, do you think we can remove the PF_NOFREEZE from bluetooth, BTW?
The create_workqueue by default marks the worker_threads to be
non_freezable. For cpu hotplug, all workqueues can be frozen
except the "kthread" w
On Sunday, 18 February 2007 17:11, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > > On Sunday, 18 February 2007 12:31, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > A very vague idea: what if parent will do
> > > >
> > > > current->flags |=
> > > > PF_PLEASE_CONSIDER_ME_AS_FROZ
On 02/18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, 18 February 2007 12:31, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > >
> > > A very vague idea: what if parent will do
> > >
> > > current->flags |= PF_PLEASE_CONSIDER_ME_AS_FROZEN_BUT_SET_TIF_FREEZE
> > > wait_for_completion(&vfork);
> > > try_to_freeze();
>
On Sunday, 18 February 2007 13:14, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sunday, 18 February 2007 12:31, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 02/18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sunday, 18 February 2007 00:47, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > However, this means that sys_vfork() makes impossible to
On 02/18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> On Sunday, 18 February 2007 12:32, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 02/18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sunday, 18 February 2007 00:42, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > On 02/17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Saturday, 17 February 2007 22:3
Hi!
> > > So I think tonight I'll start adding try_to_freeze() to the kernel
> > > threads that
> > > set PF_NOFREEZE.
> >
> > cool! While you are at it, let me try to enhance the freezer api's
> > to incorporate the PFE_* flags.
>
> Here's a patch that adds try_to_freeze() to all kernel thread
On Sunday, 18 February 2007 12:32, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > On Sunday, 18 February 2007 00:42, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > On 02/17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Saturday, 17 February 2007 22:34, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
On Sunday, 18 February 2007 12:31, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > On Sunday, 18 February 2007 00:47, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > >
> > > However, this means that sys_vfork() makes impossible to freeze processes
> > > until child exits/execs. Not good.
> >
> > Yes,
On 02/18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> On Sunday, 18 February 2007 00:42, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 02/17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >
> > > On Saturday, 17 February 2007 22:34, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > static inline int is_user_space(struct task_struct *p)
> > > >
On 02/18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> On Sunday, 18 February 2007 00:47, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > However, this means that sys_vfork() makes impossible to freeze processes
> > until child exits/execs. Not good.
>
> Yes, but this also is the current behavior.
Yes, yes, I see.
I forgot to sa
On Sunday, 18 February 2007 00:42, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > On Saturday, 17 February 2007 22:34, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > >
> > > static inline int is_user_space(struct task_struct *p)
> > > {
> > > return p->mm && !(p->flags & PF_BORROWED_MM)
On Sunday, 18 February 2007 00:47, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/18, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > On 02/17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >
> > > Alternatively, we can move the check into refrigerator(), like this:
> > >
> > > --- linux-2.6.20-git13.orig/kernel/power/process.c
> > > +++ linux-2.6.20
On 02/18, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 02/17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > Alternatively, we can move the check into refrigerator(), like this:
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.20-git13.orig/kernel/power/process.c
> > +++ linux-2.6.20-git13/kernel/power/process.c
> > @@ -39,6 +39,11 @@ void refrigerator(v
On 02/17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> On Saturday, 17 February 2007 22:34, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > static inline int is_user_space(struct task_struct *p)
> > {
> > return p->mm && !(p->flags & PF_BORROWED_MM);
> > }
> >
> > This doesn't look right. First, an exiting
On Saturday, 17 February 2007 22:34, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Rafael, I am trying to understand try_to_freeze_tasks(), and I have a
> couple of questions.
>
> static inline int is_user_space(struct task_struct *p)
> {
> return p->mm && !(p->flags & PF_BORROWED_MM);
>
Rafael, I am trying to understand try_to_freeze_tasks(), and I have a
couple of questions.
static inline int is_user_space(struct task_struct *p)
{
return p->mm && !(p->flags & PF_BORROWED_MM);
}
This doesn't look right. First, an exiting task has ->mm == N
On Thursday, 15 February 2007 15:25, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 02:31:08PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > So I think tonight I'll start adding try_to_freeze() to the kernel threads
> > that
> > set PF_NOFREEZE.
>
> cool! While you are at it, let me try to enhance
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 02:31:08PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> So I think tonight I'll start adding try_to_freeze() to the kernel threads
> that
> set PF_NOFREEZE.
cool! While you are at it, let me try to enhance the freezer api's
to incorporate the PFE_* flags.
> >
> > That would stil
On Thursday, 15 February 2007 13:20, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 09:09:51AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >
> > > Why should we make sure that PF_NOFREEZE tasks are also frozen for
> > > cpu hotplug? Instead, we can create an infrastructure which allows
> > > threads t
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 09:09:51AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > Why should we make sure that PF_NOFREEZE tasks are also frozen for
> > cpu hotplug? Instead, we can create an infrastructure which allows threads
> > to
> > specify for the scenarios they would want to be excempted from fr
On Thursday, 15 February 2007 07:34, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 10:43:35PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:40, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> > > Hello Everybody,
> > >
> > > This is an experiment towards process_freezer based im
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 10:43:35PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:40, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> > Hello Everybody,
> >
> > This is an experiment towards process_freezer based implementation
> > of cpu-hotplug. This is mainly based on ideas of Andrew Mo
Hi,
On Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:40, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> Hello Everybody,
>
> This is an experiment towards process_freezer based implementation
> of cpu-hotplug. This is mainly based on ideas of Andrew Morton,
> Ingo Molnar and Paul Mckenney featured in the discussion
> http://lkml.o
24 matches
Mail list logo
